Received: from mail-gy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]:53354) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1S6Vfj-0007AT-Kq; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 15:26:14 -0800 Received: by ghbf14 with SMTP id f14sf3625188ghb.16 for ; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 15:25:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=nMIAtSDjw7JC2jUGAgkXLOU/fyo8vnDu3001izLsbKY=; b=pAe7f2j1UfzDPLEONBt/LZMonkk04Slglb7uq4hof4vSWGU+XB7n7tbDDV8RgVE4Hz 173MOecF2+GXNM+gv8/gYthXk7PyuSIQk2oNOCBGAOGjnuKqhNCdJDT0THdP9odIim6u RXFFpqH1Ih/Gkg5QM2ewWsA6rB3AAzLr43Sl4= Received: by 10.236.184.134 with SMTP id s6mr906915yhm.17.1331421949489; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 15:25:49 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.186.14 with SMTP id n14ls5071655anp.4.gmail; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 15:25:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.236.146.10 with SMTP id q10mr901949yhj.20.1331421948568; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 15:25:48 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 15:25:48 -0800 (PST) From: RexScientiarum To: lojban@googlegroups.com Message-ID: <21816892.1633.1331421948072.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynlt15> In-Reply-To: <201203081322.29993.phma@phma.optus.nu> References: <13652222.419.1331146240191.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynes7> <201203071528.01767.phma@phma.optus.nu> <17229123.4939.1331160187554.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yncc26> <201203081322.29993.phma@phma.optus.nu> Subject: Re: [lojban] Biological taxonomy and other 'esoteric' vocabularies like chemical nomenclature MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: amt2839@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: ls.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of amt2839@gmail.com designates internal as permitted sender) smtp.mail=amt2839@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_1632_19566564.1331421948070" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / ------=_Part_1632_19566564.1331421948070 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Ah-ha!!! I looked up la'o (CLL 19.10) and I understand now that la'o is SPECIFICALLY for linnaean binomials. The ONLY time one might use la'o for something other than a binomial is if it was a term recognized more by it's spelling than it's pronunciation across languages (and only in writing I assume), otherwise names are supposed to be lojbanized and the cmavo la used. I didn't get that before... obviously. Only internationally standardized names are used with la'o. Well, in that case (besides IUPAC) lojban really does have a contingency for EVERYTHING. Cool. Thanks. On Thursday, March 8, 2012 12:22:29 PM UTC-6, Pierre Abbat wrote: > > On Wednesday, March 07, 2012 17:43:07 RexScientiarum wrote: > > Yeah, I know on the taxonomy. What I meant was that it is (sort of) > > regulated by by several groups like ICN (formerly ICBN) and ICZN, among > > others. But w/e, that is probably irrelevant (I'll explain why I even > > brought it up later). Still, my main question is how do we talk about > these > > sorts of things in lojban? Is there a cmavo that says: "Binomial > follows'? > > or 'IUPAC preffered name follows'? Or do we just use {la}, {la'o}, and > > {zoi} or w/e? > > To stick a taxonomic name, we use "la'o"; that is in fact what it was > first > used for (it derives from "latmo"). As to IUPAC, I don't know yet. > > > I HAD assumed that taxonomy, at least, would be treated in one of those > two > > ways (because, as you said, it is always treated as a foreign language, > > hence why it is italicized in print or *supposed *to be underlined when > > handwritten) but it looks as if other community members have already > begun > > to lojbanize taxonomic names so I thought MAYBE there is some feeling > that > > there is a need to lojbanize biological classification for whatever > reason > > (which is why I ask, and I thought maybe there was some feeling that the > > current Linnaean method based primarily on Latin and some Greek and > written > > in the Roman alphabet wasn't a universal, culturally/scientifically > > unbiased method. Idk, just trying to understand/rationalize why someone > > thought there had to be a lojban name for eubacteria {fadjurme} and the > > like). > > If you say "lo strepsiptera" or "lo frangula", you're using a common name > that > happens to be the same (except for capitalization) as the scientific name > for > the same thing, just as if you say "an octopus" or "la salvia". There are > ornithologists who have compiled lists of common names for every bird they > can > think of, so if someone talks about an American Robin or a Black Rail, we > know > they mean the same as a particular scientific name. I don't think we need > to do > that in Lojban, or could easily; Lojban doesn't have a lot of preexisting > names for birds, fish, or mammals. > > > As far as IUPAC goes, all I meant was that I don't know how IUPAC works > > exactly in other languages, other than the fact that it is different from > > IUPAC nomenclature in English. I don't need a description of how to > IUPAC > > naming works, at least in English, I already know how that works. Maybe > I > > was a bit misleading when I said I didn't have an esoteric understanding > of > > because I DO understand it, I just wouldn't claim to be an expert > qualified > > to write the lojban IUPAC rules and that hopefully some well > > respected career chemist happened to speak lojban and WOULD be qualified > to > > write the lojban IUPAC rules. I was trying to be humble; of course now I > > am probably needlessly getting defensive over my 'geek' ego but so be it. > > I know you weren't trying to be derogatory or anything so please don't > > take anything I say in a bad way. As far as speaking lojban, however, I > AM > > in fact a complete 'noob'. (It is a good point you made though about how > > unlike Indo-European languages IUPAC nomenclature is) > > I don't know IUPAC well enough to translate it to Lojban. Do you know it > well > enough that together we could? > > > As you said there isn't much room left in lojban for all the affixes > (which > > I had suspected might be the case) used in IUPAC nomenclature. As > > mentioned earlier, I am a complete lojban 'noob' so this might be a > stupid > > question but is there some way that a cmavo or something could be used to > > denote "Hey we're talking about a chemical nomenclature here!" and thus > > allow the 'grammar' rules within the limiters to be tweaked to be more > > IUPAC friendly while still keeping the nomenclature 'lojbanic' in the > sense > > that it is unique to lojban, uses lojban valsi and characters (in w/e > > orthography), and phonology? Would not a similar system be viable for, > say, > > a unique lojban taxonomy as well? (Since it seems, as mentioned earlier, > > that some lojban speakers [not me necessarily] appear to think biological > > taxonomy needs to be lojbanized as well.) > > I've considered using "tau" for "ide" (e.g. "tabno relkijytau"), as > "tanru" > means a binary compound phrase. It should be obvious from the presence of > words for chemical elements, rather than words for words, what kind of > binary > compound is meant. > > By the way, what does "w/e" mean? > > Pierre > > -- > li ze te'a ci vu'u ci bi'e te'a mu du > li ci su'i ze te'a mu bi'e vu'u ci > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/-7MADW5YmUkJ. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. ------=_Part_1632_19566564.1331421948070 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ah-ha!!!  I looked up la'o (CLL 19.10) and I understand now that la'o = is SPECIFICALLY for linnaean binomials.  The ONLY time one might use l= a'o for something other than a binomial is if it was a term recognized=  more by it's spelling than it's pronunciation  across languages = (and only in writing I assume), otherwise names are supposed to b= e lojbanized and the cmavo la used.  I didn't get that before... obvio= usly.  Only internationally standardized names are used with la'o. &nb= sp;Well, in that case (besides IUPAC) lojban really does have a contingency= for EVERYTHING.  Cool. Thanks.

On Thursday, March 8, 2012 12:2= 2:29 PM UTC-6, Pierre Abbat wrote:
On Wednesday, March 07, 2012 17:43:07 RexScientiarum wrote:
> Y= eah, I know on the taxonomy.  What I meant was that it is (sort of)> regulated by by several groups like ICN (formerly ICBN) and ICZN, amo= ng
> others.  But w/e, that is probably irrelevant (I'll explain= why I even
> brought it up later). Still, my main question is how do= we talk about these
> sorts of things in lojban?  Is there a cm= avo that says: "Binomial follows'?
> or 'IUPAC preffered name follows= '? Or do we just use {la}, {la'o}, and
> {zoi} or w/e?

To stick a t= axonomic name, we use "la'o"; that is in fact what it was first
used fo= r (it derives from "latmo"). As to IUPAC, I don't know yet.

> I HA= D assumed that taxonomy, at least, would be treated in one of those two
= > ways (because, as you said, it is always treated as a foreign language= ,
> hence why it is italicized in print or *supposed *to be underline= d when
> handwritten) but it looks as if other community members have= already begun
> to lojbanize taxonomic names so I thought MAYBE ther= e is some feeling that
> there is a need to lojbanize biological clas= sification for whatever reason
> (which is why I ask, and I thought m= aybe there was some feeling that the
> current Linnaean method based = primarily on Latin and some Greek and written
> in the Roman alphabet= wasn't a universal, culturally/scientifically
> unbiased method. Idk= , just trying to understand/rationalize why someone
> thought there h= ad to be a lojban name for eubacteria {fadjurme} and the
> like).

=

If you say "lo strepsiptera" or "lo frangula", you're using a common nam= e that
happens to be the same (except for capitalization) as the scient= ific name for
the same thing, just as if you say "an octopus" or "la sa= lvia". There are
ornithologists who have compiled lists of common names= for every bird they can
think of, so if someone talks about an America= n Robin or a Black Rail, we know
they mean the same as a particular sci= entific name. I don't think we need to do
that in Lojban, or could easi= ly; Lojban doesn't have a lot of preexisting
names for birds, fish, or = mammals.

> As far as IUPAC goes, all I meant was that I don't know= how IUPAC works
> exactly in other languages, other than the fact th= at it is different from
> IUPAC nomenclature in English.  I don'= t need a description of how to IUPAC
> naming works, at least in Engl= ish, I already know how that works.  Maybe I
> was a bit mislead= ing when I said I didn't have an esoteric understanding of
> because = I DO understand it, I just wouldn't claim to be an expert qualified
>= to write the lojban IUPAC rules and that hopefully some well
> respe= cted career chemist happened to speak lojban and WOULD be qualified to
&= gt; write the lojban IUPAC rules.  I was trying to be humble; of cours= e now I
> am probably needlessly getting defensive over my 'geek' ego= but so be it.
>  I know you weren't trying to be derogatory or = anything so please don't
> take anything I say in a bad way.  As= far as speaking lojban, however, I AM
> in fact a complete 'noob'. &= nbsp;(It is a good point you made though about how
> unlike Indo-Euro= pean languages IUPAC nomenclature is)

I don't know IUPAC well enough = to translate it to Lojban. Do you know it well
enough that together we = could?

> As you said there isn't much room left in lojban for all = the affixes (which
> I had suspected might be the case) used in IUPAC= nomenclature.  As
> mentioned earlier, I am a complete lojban '= noob' so this might be a stupid
> question but is there some way that= a cmavo or something could be used to
> denote "Hey we're talking ab= out a chemical nomenclature here!" and thus
> allow the 'grammar' rul= es within the limiters to be tweaked to be more
> IUPAC friendly whil= e still keeping the nomenclature 'lojbanic' in the sense
> that it is= unique to lojban, uses lojban valsi and characters (in w/e
> orthogr= aphy), and phonology? Would not a similar system be viable for, say,
>= ; a unique lojban taxonomy as well?  (Since it seems, as mentioned ear= lier,
> that some lojban speakers [not me necessarily] appear to thin= k biological
> taxonomy needs to be lojbanized as well.)

I've c= onsidered using "tau" for "ide" (e.g. "tabno relkijytau"), as "tanru"
m= eans a binary compound phrase. It should be obvious from the presence of words for chemical elements, rather than words for words, what kind of bi= nary
compound is meant.

By the way, what does "w/e" mean?

P= ierre

--
li ze te'a ci vu'u ci bi'e te'a mu du
li ci su'i ze t= e'a mu bi'e vu'u ci

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/-7= MADW5YmUkJ.
=20 To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
------=_Part_1632_19566564.1331421948070--